Bishops or Knights?
Sort:
I give them each three points. But bishops are my favourite. They offer the long range attack that seems to work well with my conservative play. People who play with skill always dominate me with their knights.
sorry likesforests, i didnt know that...
Apr 5, 2008
0
#5
I dont mind if someone starts yet another thread on a subject. As atleast I personally dont have time to search topics and basically I read it if its interesting and if my eye coughts it. So dont worry about it.
I evaluate bishops and knighst as follows (simple basic rules learned by practise and by others instructions so nothing new here):
1. A pair of bishops is usually better than one bishop + one knight.
2. In a closed position knights are usually better.
3. In an open opsition a pair of bishops is great.
4. Many times I see people exchange a bishop to a knight in early game hopeing of doubling opponents pawns to give a huge positional advance. I believe giving up the pair of bishops for doubled pawns in such an early position might be very risky in a long run. The occasions I refer to are very early positions where its difficult to know if you want to have rather a pair of bishops than a pair of knights/mixed pair after few more moves. Especially if you dont know your opponent too well and you are not a strong player.
Maybe more experienced players can correct me If I am wrong here.
thank you very much,antra.
by the way, i read other day that a final with king and 2 bishops versus king gives you mate and a final with king and 2 knights versus king doesnt give you a mate.
of course most of you knows it a long time ago :)
joaoporto - Yes, that rule is true if there are zero pawns on-board. Remember, K+2N+P vs K and K+2N vs K+P are often mate. In orher words, if you have the two knights, and know not to gobble up your opponent's last pawn, you may be able to win.
thank you very much, likeforests.
i didnt know that one of the last pawn when you have 2N.
1. i like knights better in the opening/middlegame and endgames with more than one pawn
2. knights are useful for forking (double-attacking)
3. bishops are better for skewering and pinning
4. 2 knights can manouver to create a flurry of attacks and checks
5. a bishop pair against a king is good for preventing the king from moving past a certain point on the board
6. i like to blockade pawns with bishops to prevent the pawn's unprotected partner from moving up and attacking the knight (if you had blockaded with the knight) (and if the square is unprotected
personally i like bishops better because i don't know how to use my knights too well. and if my opponent is good they usually know how to avoid knight forks.
Thanks for your post, yert - that was the meaning of my forum (read about different points of view about bishops and knights).
At that point, i ususally prefer knights in the openings and bishops to the endgame - of course im talking in general, there are a lot of games that knights are very useful at the endgame (they confuse me a lot 
)
i like knights, they are the only peice that is unstoppable, it can go anywhere it wants, and once it reaches a good square it makes a hole in the opponents structure.
Do you prefer keep bishops or knights?
Will you give 3 points each?